Risk prediction models for breast cancer-related lymphedema: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:5
|
作者
Shen, Aomei [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Wei, Xiaoxia [2 ,3 ]
Zhu, Fei [4 ]
Sun, Mengying [4 ]
Ke, Sangsang [4 ]
Qiang, Wanmin [1 ]
Lu, Qian [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Tianjin Med Univ Canc Inst & Hosp, Dept Nursing, Huanhuxi Rd, Tianjin, Peoples R China
[2] Peking Univ, Sch Nursing, Div Med & Surg Nursing, 38 Xueyuan Rd, Beijing, Peoples R China
[3] Peking Univ, Hlth Sci Ctr Evidence Based Nursing, Beijing, Peoples R China
[4] Hebei Univ, Sch Nursing, 342 Yuhua East Rd, Baoding, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Breast cancer; Lymphedema; Prediction model; Systematic review; Risk; ARM LYMPHEDEMA; SCORING SYSTEM; DIAGNOSIS; PROGNOSIS; DISSECTION;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejon.2023.102326
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: To review and critically evaluate currently available risk prediction models for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). Methods: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, WangFang Data, VIP Database were searched from inception to April 1, 2022, and updated on November 8, 2022. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess the risk of bias and applicability. Meta-analysis of AUC values of model external validations was performed using Stata 17.0. Results: Twenty-one studies were included, reporting twenty-two prediction models, with the AUC or C-index ranging from 0.601 to 0.965. Only two models were externally validated, with the pooled AUC of 0.70 (n = 3, 95%CI: 0.67 to 0.74), and 0.80 (n = 3, 95%CI: 0.75 to 0.86), respectively. Most models were developed using classical regression methods, with two studies using machine learning. Predictors most frequently used in included models were radiotherapy, body mass index before surgery, number of lymph nodes dissected, and chemotherapy. All studies were judged as high overall risk of bias and poorly reported. Conclusions: Current models for predicting BCRL showed moderate to good predictive performance. However, all models were at high risk of bias and poorly reported, and their performance is probably optimistic. None of these models is suitable for recommendation in clinical practice. Future research should focus on validating, optimizing, or developing new models in well-designed and reported studies, following the methodology guidance and reporting guidelines.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Acupuncture therapy for breast cancer-related lymphedema: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Hou, Wenzhen
    Pei, Lixia
    Song, Yafang
    Wu, Jian
    Geng, Hao
    Chen, Lu
    Wang, Yuhang
    Hu, Yao
    Zhou, Jinyong
    Sun, Jianhua
    [J]. JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY RESEARCH, 2019, 45 (12) : 2307 - 2317
  • [2] Loco-regional therapy and the risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Lin, Yan
    Xu, Ying
    Wang, Changjun
    Song, Yu
    Huang, Xin
    Zhang, Xiaohui
    Cao, Xi
    Sun, Qiang
    [J]. BREAST CANCER, 2021, 28 (06) : 1261 - 1272
  • [3] Radiation therapy targets and the risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
    Simona F. Shaitelman
    Yi-Ju Chiang
    Kate D. Griffin
    Sarah M. DeSnyder
    Benjamin D. Smith
    Mark V. Schaverien
    Wendy A. Woodward
    Janice N. Cormier
    [J]. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2017, 162 : 201 - 215
  • [4] Loco-regional therapy and the risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Yan Lin
    Ying Xu
    Changjun Wang
    Yu Song
    Xin Huang
    Xiaohui Zhang
    Xi Cao
    Qiang Sun
    [J]. Breast Cancer, 2021, 28 : 1261 - 1272
  • [5] Prospective Surveillance for Breast Cancer-Related Arm Lymphedema: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Rafn, Bolette S.
    Christensen, Jan
    Larsen, Anders
    Bloomquist, Kira
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2022, 40 (09) : 1009 - +
  • [6] Prediction models for breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review and critical appraisal
    Qiu Lin
    Tong Yang
    Jin Yongmei
    Ye Mao Die
    [J]. SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2022, 11 (01)
  • [7] Prediction models for breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review and critical appraisal
    Qiu Lin
    Tong Yang
    Jin Yongmei
    Ye Mao Die
    [J]. Systematic Reviews, 11
  • [8] Erratum to: Radiation therapy targets and the risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
    Simona F. Shaitelman
    Yi-Ju Chiang
    Kate D. Griffin
    Sarah M. De Snyder
    Benjamin D. Smith
    Mark V. Schaverien
    Wendy A. Woodward
    Janice N. Cormier
    [J]. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2017, 162 : 217 - 217
  • [9] Taxane-based chemotherapy and risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zhang, Zhenhua
    Zhang, Xiwen
    Chen, Shuntai
    Jiang, Juling
    Qi, Runzhi
    Zhang, Xing
    Xi, Yupeng
    Li, Meng
    Zheng, Honggang
    Hua, Baojin
    [J]. MEDICINE, 2019, 98 (30)
  • [10] Resistance exercise and breast cancer-related lymphedema-a systematic review update and meta-analysis
    Hasenoehrl, Timothy
    Palma, Stefano
    Ramazanova, Dariga
    Koelbl, Heinz
    Dorner, Thomas E.
    Keilani, Mohammad
    Crevenna, Richard
    [J]. SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2020, 28 (08) : 3593 - 3603